Ombudsman reader Brian Crecente, of the always excellent Red Assed Baboon, recently wrote me an e-mail with the somewhat accusatory title: "Plagarism or just being lazy?" Brian pointed me to a TeamXBox article that "apparently just cut and paste the press release and slapped a byline over it." Brian included a copy of the press release to prove his point and, sure enough, they are exactly the same (as far as I can tell). Brian asks, "I suppose it's shy of plagiarism since the people who wrote the press release will be ecstatic, but it seems unethical in some way. What do you think?"
Before answering, I felt I needed some more information, so I went straight to the source and e-mailed the article's author, TeamXBox News/Hardware Editor César A. Berardini, to ask a few basic questions about the article. His response appears in italics below, interspersed with my comments (not italicized). The bold-italics indicates my original questions to Cesar.
hi Kyle,
How is it going? Thanks for contacting TeamXbox. Regarding your question, yes, this is a "common practice", as you call it, not only on TeamXbox but in many other sites that focus on deliver [sic] news (instead of stories) first. It's been our style since 1999.
I deal with how much of a "common practice" this is below, but here I want to focus on delivering "news (instead of the stories) first." There's nothing wrong with that, but why not call a spade a spade and let the audience know that what they're reading was written by a public relations professional and not by you? This way you can get the information up quickly and still represent it fairly to the reader.
That article you mention sounds more like a media alert than a press release to me, and even press releases are modified a bit so they are easy to read. We also have found that companies don't like their info to be modified or edited and because we believe in freedom of speech for both parties, we let our visitors post any comment, no matter how hard that may sound to the company issuing that press info. As an example, everytime there is a news about an EA game, a user called FIG has tough comments about EA and its games. We have never deleted/edited his comments or anyone else's feedback.
Notwithstanding the difference between a "media alert" and a press release (a purely semantic one, as far as I can tell) I surely wouldn't advocate editing any PR information that came directly from a game company. Besides angering the PR folks, it would be more than a slight misrepresentation to, in effect, put words into their mouths. But I don't think it's any less of a misrepresentation to put up an unedited press release (or "media alert" or anything from a public relations person) and posting it under your byline with no indication of the true author, as was done here.
As for the comment about not editing comments, that is neither here nor there (but I do think it's a commendable stand).
Do you feel this is a common practice elsewhere in video game journalism? It used to be a common practice in PC news sites and TeamXbox introduced this style to video game news site. Then many other (video game coverage) sites followed us.
He's right, to an extent. A quick google search of the first ten words of the press release confirms that at least a handful of sites ran the press release verbatim. However, some of them actually identified the article as a press release, either by shouting FROM THE PRESS RELEASE, by using a more discrete [PR] note on the main page (though no indication appeared in the actual article page), or by grouping it under the "press releases" section of a newswire. TeamXBox did none of these things.
Do you feel it is clear to readers that this article is a press release and not original writing by yourself? Yes, it is clear to anyone when it is a press release since press releases have a format. "Company announced today that" (...) "Quote by executive" (...) "Game Description" Many of our visitors post the same press releases in our forums. They know they can find them in businesswire, yahoo! news or google news.
First of all, this article does not have any of those phrases or patterns in it and, to me, reads more like a quick news blurb than a press release (and I've read my fair share of both). I think it would be hard for an average reader to make this distinction, unless they troll "businesswire, yahoo! news or google news," regularly (which I assume most of them don't).
Press releases in forum posts are, again, a whole 'nother issue.
Does TeamXBox make any effort to make this clear to the reader? Same question again. There is no need for such a thing. The first thing you learn in journalism is that the audience is not dumb. They are smart and they always choose what they think is the best for them. One million users choose TeamXbox because they think it is the best site covering Xbox.
While I asked before if it was clear to the reader, here I'm asking what effort you make to make it clear to the reader. Obviously there is none. One of the first things I learned in journalism, actually, was to assume the reader is usually not as smart as you are on the particular topic you write about. After all, you write about it for a living, while they are just a random reader trying to learn more. They may not be dumb, but they don't necessarily have the savvy to figure out the difference between a press release and a poorly crafted article. What is "best for them" is probably knowing who actually wrote the article they are reading, no matter how many of them there are.
Do you feel there is anything wrong with putting your name in the byline of an article such as this that you did not write? No, there is nothing wrong with it since most of these news also include screenshots, movies and sometimes an editor's note. In the past, we used to have other fields (Source Name, Source URL, etc.) but they were discarded when we found out no one cared about them or clicked in those links. We started to use instead (like many other sites) a "thanks [source name+URL] for the heads-up" line.
First of all, I see no "thanks... for the heads-up" line anywhere in this article. Secondly, just because people don't click the link to find the same information you are reposting on your site (and why would they... they just read it) doesn't mean they don't care about the notice. Personally, I like to know when what I'm reading is written by a game company and not a game journalist, and I don't think I'm totally alone. The effort it would take to correctly source the article is not a siginificant barrier either. As for the point about screenshots and movies, those are often provided by the game company too. The editor's note might be by you, but it should be clear to the reader that the rest of the copy is not.
I hope these answers help you in your quest.
Let me add one more thing; I don't think there is a need to use a sentence such as "If I do not hear back from you, I will be forced to write on this matter without comment from you." for the simple reason it sounds more like a threat than an inquiry.
I included this line because it is true... I can't really write an article with a comment from you if I don't get a comment from you. But I did get a comment from you, and now I've commented on that comment. And the circle of life continues.
So, in answer to the original question, "plagiarism or just being lazy?" I'd have to say a little of both. Plagiarism because it doesn't correctly identify (or even hint at) the true author, and laziness because it would only take a few second to correctly identify (or even hint at) the true author.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Monday, October 11, 2004
The Ombudsman Asks: Where Do You Read?
If you read this site regularly, you probably get tired of me lecturing like I know everything about videogame journalism. Well, frankly, I get tired of lecturing too. Maybe if you all knew more I could stop.
Seriously, though, the best way to learn is to ask, so in an effort to change the tone around here a little, the start of what I hope will be a regular VG Ombudsman feature: The Ombudsman Asks. Basically, I ask a question and you guys answer it using the comments link below.
Today's question: Where and when do you read about videogames?
I don't mean "What videogame web sites do you go to?" or "What videogame magazines do you read?" but where do you read about videogames? At the computer? In the bathroom? At the breakfast table? In bed? On the subway? On your favorite easy chair? On TV (technically watching, not reading, but I'm flexible)?
I also want to know about general environment and timing. Do you read with music or the TV on in the background? What kind of lighting do you like? Do you read during the endless loading screens during Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex. Do you read while you should be working? Do you read while you should be reading something else?
Again, use the comments link below to answer.
Seriously, though, the best way to learn is to ask, so in an effort to change the tone around here a little, the start of what I hope will be a regular VG Ombudsman feature: The Ombudsman Asks. Basically, I ask a question and you guys answer it using the comments link below.
Today's question: Where and when do you read about videogames?
I don't mean "What videogame web sites do you go to?" or "What videogame magazines do you read?" but where do you read about videogames? At the computer? In the bathroom? At the breakfast table? In bed? On the subway? On your favorite easy chair? On TV (technically watching, not reading, but I'm flexible)?
I also want to know about general environment and timing. Do you read with music or the TV on in the background? What kind of lighting do you like? Do you read during the endless loading screens during Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex. Do you read while you should be working? Do you read while you should be reading something else?
Again, use the comments link below to answer.
Thursday, October 7, 2004
Review: "Power Up" by Chris Kohler
When I was 7 years old, my parents got me a copy of Nintendo Comics System, a short-lived U.S. comic series featuring all my favorite Nintendo characters. Hidden in the pages of that decidedly child-targeted magazine was an ad for a Game Boy game called Fist of the North Star. The ad featured two small, black-and-white screenshots against a large drawing of a black-haired male martial artist standing amid a desolate, red plain. The game screenshots were wholly unimpressive, but I couldn't stop staring at that exquisitely drawn full-page image that was like nothing I hadseen before. The unique look of that picture stuck with me, but I could never quite put my finger on exactly why.
Chris Kohler's Power-Up: How Japanese Video Games Gave the World an Extra Life goes a long way towards helping me understand.
Power Up's main thesis -- that the export of Japanese video games to America has brought the cultures closer together -- will resonate with any video game fanboy that has gone on to develop a love of Japanese anime, manga, or culture in general. The discussions of what makes Japanese game design unique will appeal to players that grew up with The Legend of Zelda and wondered why the Grand Theft Auto just felt different, despite the similar core gameplay. The details of Japanese gaming life and culture will satisfy any American who longs for the almost mythical gaming utopia of Japan. In short, Power Up is a pocket guide to understanding and appreciating Japanese culture through video games.
Unfortunately, it takes a little while to get to the best parts of this guide. The book spends a bit of time at the beginning giving a very abbreviated summary of video game history, both eastern and western, using information largely borrowed from more in-depth video game history books. Reader's of David Sheff's Game Over and Steven Kent's Complete History of Video Games will recognize many, if not most, of the historical events and trivia. Though Kohler adds the occasional unique observation or factoid, the history portions have in general been covered better elsewhere.
The book also struggles when Kohler tries to discuss the cinematic elements from a variety of classic Japanese games and analyze what makes them important. These analyses are relatively original and touch on some interesting ideas, but the sheer number of games discussed and the large amount of space given to simple description of the scenes (presumably added for a non-gamer audience) prevent them from getting much farther than the surface issues. This type of analysis is intriguing and worthy of more discussion (perhaps in another book), but here it seems unfocused and overly sparse.
But these weak spots are almost necessary to set up the strong, varied look at the video games and culture that comes after. Power Up discusses in explicit detail how the design and aesthetic of Japanese games has affected and been affected by both eastern and western culture. Kohler's intimate understanding of Japanese language and culture is a big help here. Power Up has entire chapters devoted to the differences between the Japanese and American games and game markets, covering everything from licensed products and game soundtracks to garbled translations and where to find games bargains in Tokyo's Akihabara district. The book is packed full of information that will be totally new to most Westerners -- some of it eye-openeing, some of it trivial almost to the point of uselessness (i.e. the Japanese restaurant Segafredo has no relation to the game company Sega), yet surprisingly interesting nonetheless.
Kohler also plays to his strengths in interviews with famous developers, both Eastern and Western, that bring out the human side of what often seems like a sterile and artificial medium. These discussions show a journalist's eye for getting the story straight, but also show a fan's curiosity and sense of wonder at getting to sit down with a personal hero. The reader gets the sense that Kohler wants to understand game design by first getting to know the person behind that game design, a process that brings out some very interesting quotes.
Power Up is a great first attempt to more fully explaining a complex foreign culture that has been hiding in the plain sight of American gamers for decades. Here's hoping that the issues Kohler brings up in this book will be discussed further in other volumes to follow.
Chris Kohler's Power-Up: How Japanese Video Games Gave the World an Extra Life goes a long way towards helping me understand.
Power Up's main thesis -- that the export of Japanese video games to America has brought the cultures closer together -- will resonate with any video game fanboy that has gone on to develop a love of Japanese anime, manga, or culture in general. The discussions of what makes Japanese game design unique will appeal to players that grew up with The Legend of Zelda and wondered why the Grand Theft Auto just felt different, despite the similar core gameplay. The details of Japanese gaming life and culture will satisfy any American who longs for the almost mythical gaming utopia of Japan. In short, Power Up is a pocket guide to understanding and appreciating Japanese culture through video games.
Unfortunately, it takes a little while to get to the best parts of this guide. The book spends a bit of time at the beginning giving a very abbreviated summary of video game history, both eastern and western, using information largely borrowed from more in-depth video game history books. Reader's of David Sheff's Game Over and Steven Kent's Complete History of Video Games will recognize many, if not most, of the historical events and trivia. Though Kohler adds the occasional unique observation or factoid, the history portions have in general been covered better elsewhere.
The book also struggles when Kohler tries to discuss the cinematic elements from a variety of classic Japanese games and analyze what makes them important. These analyses are relatively original and touch on some interesting ideas, but the sheer number of games discussed and the large amount of space given to simple description of the scenes (presumably added for a non-gamer audience) prevent them from getting much farther than the surface issues. This type of analysis is intriguing and worthy of more discussion (perhaps in another book), but here it seems unfocused and overly sparse.
But these weak spots are almost necessary to set up the strong, varied look at the video games and culture that comes after. Power Up discusses in explicit detail how the design and aesthetic of Japanese games has affected and been affected by both eastern and western culture. Kohler's intimate understanding of Japanese language and culture is a big help here. Power Up has entire chapters devoted to the differences between the Japanese and American games and game markets, covering everything from licensed products and game soundtracks to garbled translations and where to find games bargains in Tokyo's Akihabara district. The book is packed full of information that will be totally new to most Westerners -- some of it eye-openeing, some of it trivial almost to the point of uselessness (i.e. the Japanese restaurant Segafredo has no relation to the game company Sega), yet surprisingly interesting nonetheless.
Kohler also plays to his strengths in interviews with famous developers, both Eastern and Western, that bring out the human side of what often seems like a sterile and artificial medium. These discussions show a journalist's eye for getting the story straight, but also show a fan's curiosity and sense of wonder at getting to sit down with a personal hero. The reader gets the sense that Kohler wants to understand game design by first getting to know the person behind that game design, a process that brings out some very interesting quotes.
Power Up is a great first attempt to more fully explaining a complex foreign culture that has been hiding in the plain sight of American gamers for decades. Here's hoping that the issues Kohler brings up in this book will be discussed further in other volumes to follow.
Wednesday, October 6, 2004
GMR Has It Covered
A few months ago, I spent $5 at my local Electronics Boutique to get an EB Edge card. As a side bonus, I also got a subscription to GMR, three issues of which were recently redirected to my new address by the post office. I haven't really looked at any of them yet, but I will say that the covers alone are almost worth my $5.
What makes them good?
What makes them good?
- A dominant graphic: Each cover has one large, strong, graphical element -- a character from the featured game in that issue. No cluttered screenshots. No inch-tall characters in the corner. Just one dominant graphic.
These graphical elements include: A menacing looking Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas gangster with a gun pointed slightly towards the reader (September), a pastel, canvas Paper Mario reading a piece of paper (October) and a polka-dot-bikini-clad Dead or Alive Ultimate girl in a black-and-white, faux newsprint style. Each of these graphics are high resolution, and large enough to nearly all parts of the cover that don't have text. These graphics focus the cover and provide a strong hook for a reader skimming the magazine racks. - The logo: Each cover features the large, sytlized GMR logo at the top of the page. The logo is big enoug hto read, but not so big that it dominates the page. Each cover placed the logo at a slightly different location, in a different color scheme (made to match the dominant graphic above), but they are all still highly recognizable and attractive. GMR's logo is actually a visual elemnt instead of cland window dressing.
- Large, concise text: Outside of game titles (which are used sparingly), page information (see below) and an Electronic Boutique discount teaser, the September issue has 14 words on the cover. The October issue has eight. The October issue has three (Xclusive Xbox Reviews). The game titles are big andthe rest of the text is small, which is how it should be.
Readers at a newsstand are scanning these covers for information on the newest games, not a feature on "5 games to scare you silly" (to take an example from the latest GamePro). Once they open the magazine, they may very well be interested in such features, but for the most part they're not going to stand there scrutinizing the entire table of contents on the cover. Keep it focused: catch their eye with a big graphic and text element and get them to open up the magazine. The content should be able to handle it from there. - Page numbers for features: Some features on the cover have small text above the title in the form "Page 86 //FEATURE//HALO 2" to tell the reader exactly where to flip to for the featured content. The October issue didn't have this, but I hope they'll bring it back for the next issue.
Tuesday, October 5, 2004
The "Letter of the Month" Racket
"...With a single DVD player, I can watch every movie imaginable. I don't need a Paramount player to see Mission: Impossible... "
-Cara
"...For example, I have one DVD player, and amazingly enough that DVD player will play every single DVD in America. I don't have to get out my MGM player to watch Spaceballs or my Paramount player to watch Zoolander..."
-Cara--Via Internet
The first quote above comes from the latest issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly (Issue 184, Nov. 2004). The second quote comes from the latest issue of GamePro (Issue 194, Nov. 2004). Both quotes come from letters that won the "letter of the month" contest in their respective magazines.
For her trouble, Cara won a Logitech Cordless Action Controller from GamePro and a copy of "some game or another" from EGM (A picture of Def Jam: Fight for NY ran with Cara's letter in EGM, but it doesn't explicitly say that is the game she won.)
EGM ran a more concise version of the letter with the headline "You must assimilate" while GamePro's version is at least twice as long and headlined "A Modest Proposal." The EGM response focuses on the business model that keeps the competing system entrenched while the GamePro answer focuses on historical competition that led to the current system.
The fact that two different magazines (from two different publishers) decided to print and award prizes to similar letters from the same author is most likely simply a coincidence. But the occurence does point to some unscrupulous tactics that can end up unfairly skewing perception of public opinion on an issue.
The first tactic is a letter-writing campaign, in which a person or small group of people organize to write similar or identical letters to as many publications as they can, hoping one will stick enough in an editor's mind to get published. Sometimes these campaigns are legitimate, grass roots efforts for change, but other times the authors will misrepresent facts and their own identities in an effort to exaggerate public support for often controversial issues.
While this happens quite often in the newspaper realm (.pdf), I'm not aware of any such organized campaigns against the specialist videogame press. Still, videogame editors should remain mindful of the tactic. If you suddenly begin to notice an influx in letters with a similar, slanted message, you might want to consider whether they are all actually by different people.
The second tactic to sway perception of reader opinion is often referred to as "comment bombing." This is the practice of filling comment areas in blogs or message boards with positive comments in order to generate positive buzz, usually for a product. Comment bombings are often allegedly sponsored by PR companies as a part of a guerilla marketing strategy that injects advertising into places that consumers are unlikely to notice it and tune it out.
Online videogame publications are very suceptible to comment bombing, which can be much harder to detect than a letter-writing campaign, given the relatively anonymous nature of the Internet. But tactics like IP tracking and required registration can help reveal posters disingenuously claiming to be fans while actually writing from a game company headquarters. Other times, comments that seem overly positive in a sea of negative comments are often accused of being posted by covert PR employees (as in the recent Driv3r debacle). but its hard to prove that such comments are not just honest differences of opinion.
Bottom line: Editors should be mindful of the comments and opinions of their readers, but also be mindful of the potential for a dedicated few to misrepresent those opinions.
-Cara
"...For example, I have one DVD player, and amazingly enough that DVD player will play every single DVD in America. I don't have to get out my MGM player to watch Spaceballs or my Paramount player to watch Zoolander..."
-Cara--Via Internet
The first quote above comes from the latest issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly (Issue 184, Nov. 2004). The second quote comes from the latest issue of GamePro (Issue 194, Nov. 2004). Both quotes come from letters that won the "letter of the month" contest in their respective magazines.
For her trouble, Cara won a Logitech Cordless Action Controller from GamePro and a copy of "some game or another" from EGM (A picture of Def Jam: Fight for NY ran with Cara's letter in EGM, but it doesn't explicitly say that is the game she won.)
EGM ran a more concise version of the letter with the headline "You must assimilate" while GamePro's version is at least twice as long and headlined "A Modest Proposal." The EGM response focuses on the business model that keeps the competing system entrenched while the GamePro answer focuses on historical competition that led to the current system.
The fact that two different magazines (from two different publishers) decided to print and award prizes to similar letters from the same author is most likely simply a coincidence. But the occurence does point to some unscrupulous tactics that can end up unfairly skewing perception of public opinion on an issue.
The first tactic is a letter-writing campaign, in which a person or small group of people organize to write similar or identical letters to as many publications as they can, hoping one will stick enough in an editor's mind to get published. Sometimes these campaigns are legitimate, grass roots efforts for change, but other times the authors will misrepresent facts and their own identities in an effort to exaggerate public support for often controversial issues.
While this happens quite often in the newspaper realm (.pdf), I'm not aware of any such organized campaigns against the specialist videogame press. Still, videogame editors should remain mindful of the tactic. If you suddenly begin to notice an influx in letters with a similar, slanted message, you might want to consider whether they are all actually by different people.
The second tactic to sway perception of reader opinion is often referred to as "comment bombing." This is the practice of filling comment areas in blogs or message boards with positive comments in order to generate positive buzz, usually for a product. Comment bombings are often allegedly sponsored by PR companies as a part of a guerilla marketing strategy that injects advertising into places that consumers are unlikely to notice it and tune it out.
Online videogame publications are very suceptible to comment bombing, which can be much harder to detect than a letter-writing campaign, given the relatively anonymous nature of the Internet. But tactics like IP tracking and required registration can help reveal posters disingenuously claiming to be fans while actually writing from a game company headquarters. Other times, comments that seem overly positive in a sea of negative comments are often accused of being posted by covert PR employees (as in the recent Driv3r debacle). but its hard to prove that such comments are not just honest differences of opinion.
Bottom line: Editors should be mindful of the comments and opinions of their readers, but also be mindful of the potential for a dedicated few to misrepresent those opinions.
Monday, October 4, 2004
Fable Fables and Early Reviews
Seems I've been a little delinquent in the "interesting links" type posts as of late. Let's see if we can't fix that.
If you didn't read Peter Molyneux's public apology for Fable you should. If you're too busy for that, here's a relevant excerpt.
"However, what happens is that we strive to include absolutely [every feature] we've ever dreamt of and, in my enthusiasm, I talk about it to anyone who'll listen, mainly in press interviews.
...
I have come to realise that I should not talk about features too early so I am considering not talking about games as early as I do. This will mean that the Lionhead games will not be known about as early as they are, but I think this is the more industry standard."
A few random thoughts on this issue:
It was a mixture of excitement and trepidation, because of the responsibility of being the first one to review it.
I think I speak for all my readers when I say that's a responsibility we'd be happy to take off your shoulders, Chuck.
If you didn't read Peter Molyneux's public apology for Fable you should. If you're too busy for that, here's a relevant excerpt.
"However, what happens is that we strive to include absolutely [every feature] we've ever dreamt of and, in my enthusiasm, I talk about it to anyone who'll listen, mainly in press interviews.
...
I have come to realise that I should not talk about features too early so I am considering not talking about games as early as I do. This will mean that the Lionhead games will not be known about as early as they are, but I think this is the more industry standard."
A few random thoughts on this issue:
- Will this public apology affect how much information developers are willing to give game journalists before a game's release? I doubt it. While Molyneux and a few others may like to take the high road and admit responsibility when promised features don't come to pass, most developers and PR people will continue to feed the hype-machine that usually leads to more sales and presitge for them and their game.
- Should this make the press wary of reporting on promised features too long before a game's release? I don't think so, though I do think it should be made clear to the reader, either explicitly or implicitly, that early previews do not necessarily accurately represent final versions of a game.
- This kind of thing points to the journalist's responsibility as a filter for reasonable claims. If a journalist hears a developer talking up a feature (or set of features) that sound absolutely ludicrous, they should call the developer on it, perhaps by asking about how realistic these projections are. This can be tough to do on the spot and to a developer's face, but it's this kind of thing that seperates a good journalist from a great one.
It was a mixture of excitement and trepidation, because of the responsibility of being the first one to review it.
I think I speak for all my readers when I say that's a responsibility we'd be happy to take off your shoulders, Chuck.
Friday, October 1, 2004
Is GamePro 'Reader Friendly'?
Sorry for the late post, but I was too busy watching last night's U.S. presidential debates to write about videogames. I hope you were similarly occupied.
On Wednesday, I had the privilege of attending a panel discussion hosted by the American Society of Business Publisher's and Editors through my job at NPR (don't ask how this relates directly to my work. I'm not sure either.) The subject of the panel was crafting good covers, which was interesting in its own right.
For most of the panel, though, I was glued to The July/August issue of "Editor's Notes", the ASBPE newsletter, which announced the organization's Magazine of the Year awards. The winners in both the over-80,000 and under-80,000 circulation categories (ComputerWorld and CSO) are published by International Data Group. IDG also publishes what was once the most popular videogame magazine in the country, GamePro.
In a sidebar to the awards article, "Editor's Note" lists "7 Ways CSO is Reader Friendly." I decided to pick up the latest issue of GamePro (Issue 194/Nov. 2004), to see how it stacks up against what the ASBPE says is one of IDG's best publications in 'reader friendliness.'
1. Page numbers on the cover provide quick, easy access to stories.
Nope, no page numbers on the cover, but I only have to flip through eight pages of ads and masthead to get to the table of contents, (compare this to magazines like Rolling Stone to see how it could be worse.). The ToC does have large numbers and headlines, and an alphabetical "Game Finder" on the second page of the contents is also useful.
2. People cover tell readers the magazine is about them.
If you think the main characters of Halo 2, Metroid Prime 2 and Killzone are like you then, yeah, I guess this applies. Otherwise it follows the lead of most videogame magazines in going with a character-based cover instead of person-based cover. The only significant exception I can think of to this rule is Next Generation, which would occasionally put an industry luminary on the front. But I digress.
GamePro's cover is a crowded mess, to put it mildly, squeezing 11 game names and other assorted text in between five character pictures and two thumbnail screenshots. On the one hand, putting everything you think is mildly interesting might get a few more readers to take a second look at your cover. On the other hand, the lack of a singular focus makes it hard for casual glancers to process the cover quickly, which might mean they'll pass it by. In general, I'd suggest they simplify a bit.
3. "Story" boxes on features quickly tell the reader exactly what they'll get from the story.
No "story boxes," but the cover feature on first-person shooters does feature a sidebar list of "All-time best selling FPS games for each system." That informative t's right below a pretty tasteless "guest review" of Halo 2 by an inexplicably Scottish-accented Samus Aran, so the sidebars are a wash.
4. Document number listed at the bottom of feature articles, provides easy access to the article and related information on the CSO website.
No document numbers, but they do feature a "Get More Online" graphic at the bottom of some features encouraging you to visit the website. Once you get there, though, you're on your own to find the information.
5. Bios at the ends of articles solicit feedback
Nope. Not even a real name at the end of the article to let you know who wrote it. But they do encourage feedback through a well done letters section and some unique letter-response feature like "Buyers Beware" (investigating glitches and rip-offs) and GeekSpeak (technical issues explained in English).
6. "Tear-out" features provide concise information in a format that can be passed around.
Nothing like this. The articles are pretty concise, though.
7. Experienced staff in knowledgeable about the market.
They seem to know what they're talking about for the most part, and they convey this knowledge to the readers.
So, after all this, the final verdict is pretyt mixed. Do you readers think GamePro and other game magazines are "reader friendly?" Let us know using the comments link below.
On Wednesday, I had the privilege of attending a panel discussion hosted by the American Society of Business Publisher's and Editors through my job at NPR (don't ask how this relates directly to my work. I'm not sure either.) The subject of the panel was crafting good covers, which was interesting in its own right.
For most of the panel, though, I was glued to The July/August issue of "Editor's Notes", the ASBPE newsletter, which announced the organization's Magazine of the Year awards. The winners in both the over-80,000 and under-80,000 circulation categories (ComputerWorld and CSO) are published by International Data Group. IDG also publishes what was once the most popular videogame magazine in the country, GamePro.
In a sidebar to the awards article, "Editor's Note" lists "7 Ways CSO is Reader Friendly." I decided to pick up the latest issue of GamePro (Issue 194/Nov. 2004), to see how it stacks up against what the ASBPE says is one of IDG's best publications in 'reader friendliness.'
1. Page numbers on the cover provide quick, easy access to stories.
Nope, no page numbers on the cover, but I only have to flip through eight pages of ads and masthead to get to the table of contents, (compare this to magazines like Rolling Stone to see how it could be worse.). The ToC does have large numbers and headlines, and an alphabetical "Game Finder" on the second page of the contents is also useful.
2. People cover tell readers the magazine is about them.
If you think the main characters of Halo 2, Metroid Prime 2 and Killzone are like you then, yeah, I guess this applies. Otherwise it follows the lead of most videogame magazines in going with a character-based cover instead of person-based cover. The only significant exception I can think of to this rule is Next Generation, which would occasionally put an industry luminary on the front. But I digress.
GamePro's cover is a crowded mess, to put it mildly, squeezing 11 game names and other assorted text in between five character pictures and two thumbnail screenshots. On the one hand, putting everything you think is mildly interesting might get a few more readers to take a second look at your cover. On the other hand, the lack of a singular focus makes it hard for casual glancers to process the cover quickly, which might mean they'll pass it by. In general, I'd suggest they simplify a bit.
3. "Story" boxes on features quickly tell the reader exactly what they'll get from the story.
No "story boxes," but the cover feature on first-person shooters does feature a sidebar list of "All-time best selling FPS games for each system." That informative t's right below a pretty tasteless "guest review" of Halo 2 by an inexplicably Scottish-accented Samus Aran, so the sidebars are a wash.
4. Document number listed at the bottom of feature articles, provides easy access to the article and related information on the CSO website.
No document numbers, but they do feature a "Get More Online" graphic at the bottom of some features encouraging you to visit the website. Once you get there, though, you're on your own to find the information.
5. Bios at the ends of articles solicit feedback
Nope. Not even a real name at the end of the article to let you know who wrote it. But they do encourage feedback through a well done letters section and some unique letter-response feature like "Buyers Beware" (investigating glitches and rip-offs) and GeekSpeak (technical issues explained in English).
6. "Tear-out" features provide concise information in a format that can be passed around.
Nothing like this. The articles are pretty concise, though.
7. Experienced staff in knowledgeable about the market.
They seem to know what they're talking about for the most part, and they convey this knowledge to the readers.
So, after all this, the final verdict is pretyt mixed. Do you readers think GamePro and other game magazines are "reader friendly?" Let us know using the comments link below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)